“We’re all so jaded by politicians that you could make a case, in a tax reform kind of situation, where some taxes might go up, but the overall taxes might go down,” said Chip Tarbutton, president of the Roanoke Tea Party. “That is conceivable that it could happen. But that’s generally not what people do. So anytime somebody is unwilling to sign a no-tax pledge, it does make me a little queasy.”

The pledge could be a good thing for Cuccinelli.

“There’s this impulse, I think, to say that signing a pledge boxes in a politician, but I think that the opposite is true,” said Pete Sepp, executive vice president at the Alexandria-based National Taxpayers Union. “It frees an elected official to say exactly what he means on topics like tax reform. And it sends a clear message that we’re talking about reforming the system rather than raising revenues, when you commit to a pledge.”

John Jaggers, operations director for the Northern Virginia Tea Party, said Cuccinelli is going in the wrong direction — especially after Republicans voted for tax increases in the General Assembly’s 2013 legislative session with a controversial transportation bill.

“My initial reaction is that, given what the General Assembly just did, not only should Ken Cuccinelli sign the tax pledge, but he should offer to cut taxes in his administration, should he win,” Jaggers said.

But Keith Freeman, chairman of the Hampton Roads Tea Party, said Cuccinelli’s decision to not re-sign could be right in line with his plans to reform the tax code.

“I personally think it’s courageous for him to stand up and say, ‘I’m not signing these pledges’,” Freeman said. “First of all, they’re unenforceable. So say what you like. But [he’s saying] I’m just not going to be trapped into something that I don’t agree with and that doesn’t allow the flexibility required sometimes to reform the tax code, for instance.”

Freeman called Norquist’s pledge too narrow.

“Norquist’s pledge in a nutshell, is, if revenue to the government increases, it’s considered a tax increase,” Freeman said. “And so if you sign it, you’re prohibited from doing anything to create that situation.”

If I lowered your rate, and everybody else in your marginal rate, and revenue to the government increased, that would be considered a tax increase. Now tell me how that makes any sense.”

Elizabeth Malm, economist with the Tax Foundation, a nonpartisan tax policy organization, said it all depends on how you define “simplification.” It’s possible to reform the tax code by broadening the base of those who pay — which would of course raise taxes on some — and lowering rates, without really changing the overall revenue the state collects, she said.

“An ideal tax code doesn’t favor certain industries or activities, but treats everyone equally,” Malm said in an email. “If bases are broad, it is still possible to raise adequate and stable revenues while simultaneously keeping rates at a low level.”

Pledge or no pledge, Cuccinelli needs to hammer out the specifics of what simplifying the tax code actually means, Tarbutton said.

“If he’s really talking about some kind of substantial tax reform, he would need to kind of lay that out,” Tarbutton said. “What exactly does that look like?”